31–40 of 56 posts
Oh you want to change X? Click show menu bar on the orange thing! Notice the menu? Notice that your orange bar disappeared? Wonder how to get it back? It's in view, uncheck menu bar!
So NOT intuitive.
Also, their feedback thing was down when I tried to report this :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it's just faster because none of your extensions are running? The ones you listed sound like they probably use lots of CPU time and memory, and if they are disabled I'm sure FF runs much faster / lighter.
I can't comment on how much the extensions might have affected things, but startup time was significantly improved: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Sprints/Startup_Time_Improv...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From my view, the highest highlighted feature was the tabs, followed by the 3 you mention. I counted WebM as Chrome, given that it is Google's codec, but I'm not sure its in Chrome 5 either :(. Looking further down, I was thinking that WebSockets, Indexed DB, Crash Protection, and the key feature of JetPack (Add-Ons not requiring restart) were all pioneered by Chrome. That leaves The Web Console, which I have not yet…
Ok, if you want to know all the features, I think the best way is to read this: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/beta/technology , and then try it out to get a feel for all the UI changes. According to wikipedia, Chrome 5 does not support WebM: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrome_%28browser%29 WebSockets: Yay, you're finally right, Chrome did pioneer WebSockets. Sadly, it did not update its implementation to refl…
> ... and learn about what you're talking about before you speak. > Ok, if you want to know all the features ...Now, back to the discussion.
WebM: You are correct, Chrome 5 does not support WebM, although it is in the dev version of Chrome 6. I do think, however, that the perception of the feature is it was Google's first, considering its their codec.
WebSockets: Please don't try to pretend Chrome is ignoring the standards changes. The new version is in Chrome 6 for you to try, if you're interested. My point is that this is a feature they drove to market, and got everyone else to support, hence my perception of it.
IndexedDB: Again, the specific technology is beside the point. Google has been pushing for offline storage since Gears, and now everyone else is implementing it (albeit a slightly different backend). You see where I'm going with this.
Crash Protection: I stand corrected. I always think of Chrome being the browser pushing the segregated processes, better plugin separation, etc, but it appears IE8 was first. Still, Firefox is definitely not leading the market on this one.
JetPack: as per aboodman, I will call this a wash.
WebConsole: It is a bit specious to give Firefox credit for a 3rd party extension (FireBug), but regardless, this feature doesn't support my point, and I never pretended it did.
HTML5/CSS3: Every browser coming out has been touting these two technologies for ages, most of the time without a clear consensus on what they even entailed. At this point you couldn't not put them on a feature list. So I don't particularly consider it valuable or surprising to see them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, though GreaseMonkey will always be available to those who choose to (know to) install it.
It's Greasemonkey, not GreaseMonkey. Greasemonkey is a third-party extension. It wasn't created and isn't maintained by Mozilla, so it can't be officially obsoleted by Jetpack. That said, if Jetpack supported transparently installing Greasemonkey scripts (the way Chrome does -- http://mashable.com/2010/02/01/google-chrome-greasemonkey-2/ ), it would effectively obsolete Greasemonkey because there'd be no need to inst…
As far as I know, Greasemonkey essentially runs user-selected javascript on a page automatically. The impression I get is that Jetpack does the same thing. Therefore, there will be no need for a third-party extension to achieve this functionality. Therefore, Greasemonkey will be "unnecessary," rendering it obsolete, regardless of any special edge cases. (Even 40K user scripts can be considered special edge cases - the set of actual implementation is much smaller than the set of possible javascript implementations.)
"Obsolete" may be an overloaded term, but this is the plain English usage, and it's the usage I'm using.
EDIT: I misunderstood that Jetpack was originally an extension and not just a codename for a new feature.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's Greasemonkey, not GreaseMonkey. Greasemonkey is a third-party extension. It wasn't created and isn't maintained by Mozilla, so it can't be officially obsoleted by Jetpack. That said, if Jetpack supported transparently installing Greasemonkey scripts (the way Chrome does -- http://mashable.com/2010/02/01/google-chrome-greasemonkey-2/ ), it would effectively obsolete Greasemonkey because there'd be no need to inst…
Users decide whether something is obsolete, not creators. "Obsolete" refers to something that is antiquated, even if it is still in good working order. From Wikipedia: "Technical obsolescence may occur when a new product or technology supersedes the old, and it becomes preferred to utilize the new technology in place of the old." As far as I know, Greasemonkey essentially runs user-selected javascript on a page autom…
Noticeably faster that 3.6.6, except none of my extensions work. FF4b1 disabled: 1 Password, Delicious Bookmarks, Firebug, Greasemonkey, Google Toolbar, Stylish, YSlow and others...
I agree definitly alot faster, but it's a shame almost no plugins work except for extensions/addons/plugins found at http://mozillalabs.com/ But just give it a little time, firefox 4 is definitly worth the wait.
The big deal with Firefox 4 is support for Jetpack: https://jetpack.mozillalabs.com/ Like with Chrome, and more recently Safari, we can now write Firefox extensions using HTML/CSS/Javascript.
Lots of cool stuff to come in the next beta as well: Electrolysis (even more process seperation) merged with trunk recently: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=571166 Hardware accelerated graphics should be turned on by default soon as well. And of course, the continued iteration of the new theme, many platform featured to be added...
It is almost solved with the memory fox plugin, but I still need to restart Firefox 3.x every month instead of every week.
I hope that Firefox 4.x will address this problem.
Otherwise, it does feel faster, though I find it funny that Firebug currently doesn't work even though it's prominently listed as one of their main developer tools.
They worked really hard on making the add-on interface more intuitive and cleaner, but really the thing everyone wants is better memory management.